Abstract
Critics contend that intercollegiate athletic administrators, including compliance officers who work in highly formalized environments, generally exhibit restricted moral thinking that is defined by organizational rules (Lumpkin, Stoll, & Beller, 1999). Cognitive moral development’s dominance on moral reasoning research has assisted in supporting this argument because investigations are framed from one independent theory (e.g., justice) and measure moral reasoning (Walker, Pitts, Hennig, & Matsuba, 1995). As a result, the interdependent nature between individuals’ morality and moral reasoning in real-life work experiences is unclear. Using contextual practical reasoning as a framework, Pacific-10 compliance officers’ were interviewed to examine their morality and moral reasoning. The findings showed compliance officers engaged in practical reasoning in resolving day-to-day work-related moral problems. Furthermore, the findings highlighted the interdependent relationship among participants’ conceptions of morality, their moral perceptions and sensitivities, and their practical reasoning.
Recommended Citation
Kihl, Lisa A.
(2009)
"Pacific-10 Compliance Officers’ Morality and Moral Reasoning,"
Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics: Vol. 2, Article 8.
Available at:
https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/jiia/vol2/iss1/8